Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court's Ginsburg says at New York lecture `any woman will not do'
AP ^ | 9/21/05 | Nahal Toosi

Posted on 09/21/2005 8:10:54 PM PDT by Crackingham

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last
To: Crackingham
There are "some women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights," Ginsburg told those gathered at the New York City Bar Association.

Last time I checked the Constitution, this was not the function of the Supreme Court.

41 posted on 09/21/2005 8:31:54 PM PDT by Roy Tucker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Ruth Bader Ginsburg

So much for the lie about Leftist Supreme Court Justices being unpolitical.

42 posted on 09/21/2005 8:32:09 PM PDT by MNJohnnie ("Don't get stuck on stupid, reporters.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

It's disgusting and frightening that this hideous creature is on the Supreme Court.


43 posted on 09/21/2005 8:32:57 PM PDT by isrul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68

It is inappropriate that a woman on the Court be promoting an individual group rather than enforcing law and the Constitution. R-B-G came onboard with the intention of implementing the Equal Rights Amendment by fiat. Based on that she is unfit to serve.


44 posted on 09/21/2005 8:34:26 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Ginsberg was an ACLU lawyer, and therefore not qualified to be on the Supreme Court. Imagine if Bush nominated a lawyer from the NRA legal staff.


45 posted on 09/21/2005 8:35:17 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Please give her JRB. Please!


46 posted on 09/21/2005 8:35:25 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Lord I hope that Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg is the next one to go.


47 posted on 09/21/2005 8:37:12 PM PDT by kennedy ("Why would I listen to losers?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

If not just any woman will do, then just make it Luttig. Bush has appointed more blacks, women, and minorities than any other president but is still accused of being a rascist. Just give us an originalist who might conceivably be confirmed. No further stratergery needed.


48 posted on 09/21/2005 8:39:09 PM PDT by Rumierules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #49 Removed by Moderator

To: Crackingham
Ruth Buzzi offers her 3 cents worth...
50 posted on 09/21/2005 8:40:44 PM PDT by tubebender (OK...Whom stole my tag line???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: msnimje

"Does this mean if the President nominates a big Hairy man who smokes cigars she will RESIGN???"

Oh boy! That would be so great!


51 posted on 09/21/2005 8:40:57 PM PDT by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

We have had some pretty dumb Supreme Court Justices throughout our history, but can you imagine ANY of them pulling this crap with Presidents like FDR, Lincoln, Wilson, or Jackson?


52 posted on 09/21/2005 8:41:38 PM PDT by Democratshavenobrains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68

Further confirmation from this kook Ginsberg that liberals hate traditions. I have never heard of a sitting Supreme Court Justice weighing in on who a president should select for the Supreme Court. It's an outrage.


53 posted on 09/21/2005 8:44:31 PM PDT by dennisw (If you can serve a cup of tea right, you can do anything - Gurdjieff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

I wonder if anyone else on SCOTUS will tell her what they think? Publicly?


54 posted on 09/21/2005 8:47:34 PM PDT by Rumierules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Ruth Bader Ginsburg told an audience Wednesday that she doesn't like the idea of being the only female justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.

My suggestion to her is to resign. Then she wouldn't be the only female justice on the Supreme Court.

55 posted on 09/21/2005 8:51:16 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Government is running amuck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Churchill remarked about someone that he was the sort of person who gave pedastry a bad name. Well, Ruthie is the sort of person who gives feminism a bad name.


56 posted on 09/21/2005 8:52:45 PM PDT by mathurine (ua)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hsalaw
"Does this mean if the President nominates a big Hairy man who smokes cigars she will RESIGN???" Oh boy! That would be so great!

Yeah, I think so. Unless of course, the Big Hairy man is Janet Reno.

57 posted on 09/21/2005 8:52:48 PM PDT by msnimje (Cogito Ergo Sum Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
There are "some women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights," Ginsburg told ...

If for no other reason, and there are many, this beotch needs to be impeached.

58 posted on 09/21/2005 8:53:18 PM PDT by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
Good thinking! National Rifle Association President Sandra Froman for associate justice.
59 posted on 09/21/2005 8:54:34 PM PDT by AlienCrossfirePlayer (Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt for Vice President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: WarPaint

Exactly.

Ruthie is a partisan hack. Pubbies should have filibustered her.


60 posted on 09/21/2005 8:54:40 PM PDT by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson